politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Your approach to rhetoric is the "gee thanks I'm cured" meme. You aren't willing to meet people where they are at, you just want to tell them what they 'should' do or else they get the hose again.
You have to meet people where they are at. Have you ever interacted with some one in a mental health crisis? You can't just get them out of the street and get them to stop putting gloves on their feet by telling them what they "should" be doing. You have to meet them where they are at and get them to understand that you understand why they are where they are. To do that you have to come down from your position trying to brow beat them into doing what you want them and actually try to understand them.
So you saw a YouTube video on strategic voting and now you think you know better. Well guess what. People are going to go into November with the following information: They had a better quality of life under Trump than they do Biden. That's where they are starting. You keep arguing about what people should think instead of trying to understand what they do think and why they think that way. People who are voting for Trump are making a strategic decision, but you're too obtuse and self concerned to notice that the Democrats and Biden really haven't done shit for anyone.
I want the Democrats to win, but how you are going about making the argument for Biden is actually making things worse. You need to spend some time thinking about why people do the things they do and think the things they think so you can understand them. Understanding some one doesn't mean you have to agree with them, but you can't convince some one of something if you don't understand them.
And you aren't special in this regard. Mainstream Democrats, Corporate media, and probably half of Lemmy are relying on the same, tired, show to be a failure strategy you are using. It doesn't work. You can't beat people into agreeing with you.
Just like Biden needs to, you have to address peoples actual concerns. And take Michigan as a case study in this. Biden was utterly floundering in the polls. He was dropping sub 1:10 of winning the big game prior to Michigan. Undecided won the narrative in this, and has forced Biden to shift policy on Israel. Because of this he's having to address his biggest weakness going into November, and is becoming a stronger candidate because of it.
Allowing Biden to proceed with out criticism, this idiotic 8th grade level of understanding around strategic voting, Blue no matter who: These are going to lose you the election in November. My point was that you just don't get it, so I've put some words down to try and help you out. But right now, your approach to rhetoric and your supposed strategic approach to voting is hurting Bidens ability to get into office more than it's helping.
You want Biden in office after November? Demand more from him. You want the Democrats to win? Get them to do things that materially help people's lives. Browbeating people into submission when you have demonstrated that you have no idea why they think what they think not going to get you any votes .
Where have I said we shouldn't demand more from Biden and the Democrats? I would argue the opposite. Biden didn't get my vote in the primary. My claim is that voting against the Democrats in the general election does not get you more from the Democrats, it enables the party trying to make our lives significantly worse.
You can criticize the party while still voting for them when the alternative is a party bent on ending democracy. You can also primary all the candidates that don't represent your values. I would encourage it. I don't understand why it's so difficult to acknowledge Democrats both need to improve the party AND win every election against every GOP candidate possible.